My husband and I work at the same university; he is a professor in the hard sciences and I’m an adjunct instructor who teaches literature and writing. I frequently edit the scientific articles and grant proposals that he and the postdoctoral researchers working under him write. I used to be happy to help him in this way, but lately I have begun to feel that this favor is just another way that the university benefits from my work — and the work of many humanities adjuncts — without fair compensation.
The discrepancy between the salaries my husband and I receive makes it abundantly clear that the university reveres the sciences (a field dominated by men) and neglects the humanities (a field dominated by women, particularly at the adjunct level). When my husband publishes an article or receives a grant, the university gets money and recognition, and yet I am not compensated for my role in this achievement. My editing is not trivial work; one article or proposal can take hours, which is time that I could otherwise spend on teaching or trying to advance my own research. Why shouldn’t I be compensated for my specialized contribution to his scholarship? For me, this is not an intellectual question; it has begun to make my blood boil.
On the other hand, as a researcher at a public university, my husband has limited access to funding that he could use to pay another editor and, as a pre-tenure faculty member, is in a somewhat vulnerable position himself. Should I help him as a loving partner, or only do editing work for paying customers? — Name Withheld
From the Ethicist:
I’m not sure marriage is the right arena to fight the many genuine inequities in the system of rewards you’ll find in the university, and in our larger society. Even leaving love and devotion out of account, you have an interest in your husband’s getting tenure. You ask why you shouldn’t be compensated for your contribution. The problem is that in an institution like a university, it’s not appropriate for someone to supervise paid work performed by a spouse, and nobody else is in a position to do so. Still, as you note, your husband could pay someone else to do the job, and as your boiling blood suggests, mixing up personal and professional relationships can cause complications.
If you were happy to help your husband in this way — if you saw it as the act of a loving partner with complementary skills — I’d say that doing so raises no ethical concerns. But you have no obligation to edit your husband’s papers, and you’ve come to experience it not as part of a mutually supportive relationship but as part of a larger pattern of exploitation. So you should feel free to bail. It isn’t really a gift if it makes you grit your teeth.
While you’re thinking about these issues, perhaps you could get involved in efforts on campus to do something about pay and other conditions. Adjuncts at your university may or may not be unionized (I don’t know what the situation is at your campus), but unions aren’t the only way to try to change things for the better.
A Bonus Question
Early in the pandemic, my ex-boyfriend had a severe mental break. He was hospitalized in the summer of 2020, but escaped the hospital and has been missing ever since. I loved him very much but broke up with him a week before his hospitalization because his manic behavior was scaring me. We had been dating for five months. After he went missing, I really threw myself into doing everything I could to help find him: making posters, sharing leads with the detectives, talking on Facebook to people who thought they’d seen him, etc. It was all-consuming, but I was all in, motivated by love and worry.
I had never met his family before, but came to talk a lot with his aunt, who was like a second mother to him. She recently sent me a thank-you note and a check for a couple of hundred dollars. The truth is, I just finished my studies and could really use the money. But I don’t want to cash it. I helped out as an expression of my love for my ex-boyfriend. I don’t want his family to feel as if they owe me, and I also know that they aren’t rich. What should I do? — Name Withheld
From the Ethicist:
If the family had offered you a few hundred dollars to help them in advance, you might have had reason to feel put out. You were acting with no thought of any reward. But it seems clear that his aunt has offered you this money simply as a way to express her gratitude, not because she thinks this is what your services were worth. I’d urge you to accept it in the spirit in which it was given.
Readers Respond
The last newsletter’s question was from a reader asking whether it was ethical to have children in a warming world. She wrote: “My fiancé and I, who are both Generation Z, care deeply about the planet. … Is it selfish to have children knowing full well that they will have to deal with a lower quality of life thanks to the climate crisis and its many cascading effects?”
In his response, the Ethicist noted that the letter writer’s children would only make a small marginal contribution to climate change themselves, and likewise would be unlikely to solve the problem for humanity. He wrote: “Probably the key question to ask is whether you can give your offspring a good prospect of a decent life. … It sounds as if you’ve already made the judgment that your kids would be all right.” (Reread the full question and answer here.)
⬥
An argument I’ve heard for having children on a warming planet is that my choice to bring them into the world is my greatest act of optimism, and a commitment to a long term future for human thriving. I can’t ethically think “not my problem” when I know my children are to deal with the consequences of my personal, political, financial and professional actions. — Dot
⬥
I decided 50 years ago that it was irresponsible to have children. I’m far more concerned about the negative effects human population has had on other species than I am about the quality of future human life due to our own behavior. The best thing that could happen to the planet is billions fewer humans. — Dennis
⬥
Has the letter writer considered adoption? This couple sound as if they would make excellent parents and would be depriving themselves of a great source of joy to forego children. If the ethics of bringing a new life into the world are too troubling, I would remind the letter writer that there are many of us who, as adoptees already in the world, were grateful that we were raised by parents who chose adoption. — Suzanne
⬥
The position that the future, unborn child would be either a victim or a cause of global warming is flawed. This is not an either/or quandary. Each human born to our overpopulated planet will be both victim and contributor to global warming and the human catastrophe that is unfolding. I would say that not having children is the most sensible and humane decision at this point. — Laurie
⬥
As a descendant of African slaves, I adhere to the idea that the world will always have a crisis, there will always be moments that lack hope and the future will always be obscured by our unfortunate current reality. Yet, they had children. I live a much better life than they did. I have an identity that they have lost. I also now have my own trials and tribulations, that is part of being Human. If you want children, have them. — Mischael
The post I Support My Husband’s Career With Unpaid Work. Can I Stop? appeared first on New York Times.
